The Witch Hunt Against Australia’s Cardinal George Pell: Five Facts You Need To Know

Yes, the cases against Australia's Cardinal George Pell are nothing less than a wild-eyed anti-Catholic witch hunt by the Australian government against the Catholic Church. Take it to the bank.

What is our evidence? Plenty. Here are five fast facts you should know about the false accusations against Cardinal Pell.

1. The Australian government began investigating Cardinal Pell over five years ago even though there had been no crime reported against him.

That's right. It is common sense that police only investigate a person when there is suspicion or evidence of that person committing a crime. But this was not the case with Cardinal Pell.

A Melbourne detective admitted in court that an investigation began against Pell in March of 2013 even though there were no criminal complaints against him. Pell's attorney then rightly observed, "It was an operation looking for a crime and a complainant."

2. Pell's publicly known accusers are a hodgepodge of career criminals, admitted drug addicts, and ne'er-do-wells who have lodged bogus complaints before.

There has been the late Damian Dignan, who had a criminal history for assault and drunk driving and also accused a female teacher of beating him during class when he was a youth. And Lyndon Monument, an admitted drug addict, served almost a year in prison for violently assaulting a man and a woman over a drug debt. The unlucky Monument has also accused a boyhood teacher of forcing him to perform sex acts.

But it would be hard to top the bloke who first accused Pell in 2002 of abuse back in 1961. This lad was indeed a career criminal who had not only been involved with drug dealing, illegal gambling, tax evasion, and "organized crime in a labor union," but also had an impressive 39 court convictions under his belt. A upstanding citizen, indeed. A judge cleared Pell after an inquiry.

One can only imagine the other shifty chaps we have not even heard about.

3. Even secular observers have admitted that Pell is not being treated fairly at all.

In a May 2017 article in the Sydney Morning Herald, Australian politician Amanda Vanstone began her piece by saying that she is "no fan of organized religion," but then she wrote:

"The media frenzy surrounding Cardinal George Pell is the lowest point in civil discourse in my lifetime. I'm 64.

"What we are seeing is no better than a lynch mob from the dark ages. Some in the media think they are above the law both overseas and at home …

"What we are seeing now is far worse than a simple assessment of guilt. The public arena is being used to trash a reputation and probably prevent a fair trial. Perhaps the rule of law sounds as if it's too esoteric to worry about."

And a prominent legal group in Australia, the Justice Institute of Victoria, has concluded that the "lack of regard" for the cardinal's rights was "a startling affront" to the cornerstone of the nation's legal system.

4. Accusations against Cardinal Pell were widely circulated in a 2017 book that has been roundly discredited.

In 2017, media outlets in Australia fell over themselves to heap praise on a Pell-bashing book by muckraking writer Louise Mulligan. Cardinal: The Rise and Fall of George Pell is Mulligan's wild, 384-page attempt to single-handedly take down the cleric on her own, but the media surely tried to help the woman along.

But as writer Peter Craven demonstrated in a June 2017 review of the book, Mulligan's scholarship leaves a lot to be desired. In short, Craven concluded:

"Louise Milligan's Cardinal has plenty of inaccuracies ranging from St Kevin's uniforms to clerical titles. She is the diametrical opposite of Helen Garner in her famous trial books: instead of presenting herself as an unreliable narrator – full of doubts and flaws – she is a writer of flaming convictions and sensationalist prose who backs her intuitions in the face of any notion of evidence or scruple.

"The upshot is a racketing case for the prosecution. One can only hope to God that in the present climate people will be capable of realising this is a case being mounted for a witch trial."

"These matters have been under investigation now for nearly two years. There have been leaks to the media, relentless character assassination, and for more than a month claims that a decision on laying charges is 'imminent' …

"I repeat that I am innocent of these charges. They are false. The whole idea of sexual abuse is abhorrent to me …

"I have been consistent and clear in my total rejection of these allegations. News of these charges strengthens my resolve, and court proceedings now offer me an opportunity to clear my name and then return to my work in Rome."

When we outlined facts about Cardinal Pell's case last summer, we wrote at the time:

We're not buying any of this. We pray that justice will be served, but we doubt it. TheMediaReport.com has been observing the climate against the Catholic Church in Australia for some time now, and we have never seen anything like it. Imagine the hatred against the Church of the Boston Globe and the New York Times combined and spread out over an entire country. The climate is truly insane.

Australian law enforcement is claiming that Pell's case is being treated like any other historical offense. No, it isn't. Police do not give a rip about someone coming forward to claim someone touched them over their bathing suit 40 years ago. But this is a Catholic priest, and a high-ranking one at that. This is a big fish in the eyes of law enforcement.

Will another innocent cleric be dragged off to prison for crimes he never committed? We believe so, but we hope we're wrong.

Unfortunately, if the stories out of Australia are any indication, we have been entirely correct.

Comments

My only qoestion. Why is Mr Innocent, Pell, making this a "Closed Trail" ? Why is he so concerned about making all evidence stay Under Wraps ? Keeping the Public from finding out anything.

We had the same situation in my state. A flakey, drug addict, had our dear, beloved, Fr Kelleher, arrested. We had a web page, and rally for poor, dear, old, Fr Kelleher. It didn't make any sense. And the Diocese was doing everything they could to supress the Police Report, from 30 yaesr ago. Fr Kelleher still loved that rotten child so much, he didn't want him being exposed. And the local Baptist Police, like Australia, were just a bunch of backwoods, "Anti-Catholics" anyway.

But the evidence was allowed to be introduced. And it turns out Fr Kelleher admitted to fondeling the boys private parts. 30 years ago. In the Police Report. The Diocese also had four rape complaints aginst him, over the years. Which they kept quiet. He, his lawyers, and the Diocese, had been lying all along.

So, when I hear how innocent, and persecuted Cardinal Pell is. And at the same time. He is demanding the case be sealed, from the public. I have to raise an eyebraw.

Sorry, True Catholic 2, but we need to correct you on your claim that Pell has been “demanding that the case be sealed.”.

In truth, it has been government prosecutors who have asked that the trial be secret:

“On Friday, prosecutors in the state of Victoria applied for a ‘super injunction’ against news coverage of the separate trials. Legal experts described the application as an extreme move aimed at keeping juries in both cases from learning anything that might cause bias.”

it was the Prosecution that insisted on the gag order, not Cardinal Pell. Just more evidence of the witch-hunt because the evidence would prove his innocence. The first jury reportedly found him innocent by a majority of 10 to 2 so they ordered a retrial, they would have kept going until they found a jury to convict him.

'True Catholic 2' on the 1st January, tells us about "poor, old, Fr. Kelleher". And ends with his conclusion that this priest, and his lawyers, had been lying all along?. His chosen example was to throw suspicion on all cases involving supression orders. Hmmm?. Well… speaking about supression, why has 'TrueCatholic2' supressed his own name?. If he wants us to believe him? And for us to assume he has checked his facts?. Then why doesn't he put his real name, and his credibility, on the line?.

Malcolm, I think this is a pretty poor argument towards "True Catholic 2", citing his lack of credibility because he doesn't give his real name. What do you have to say to LLC and your past hero, Publion, fellow cohorts who don't go by their real name. Also, I fail to find all your input, deception and lies to display any form of credibility.

“What do you have to say to LLC and your past hero, Publion, fellow cohorts who don't go by their real name” = interesting comment. It seems that Catholics cannot point out the hypocrisy of the Media when they completely ignore other organizations guilty of the same horrendous crimes, and yet it is ok for you to point out that other posters on this blog use a “nom du plume”. Very typical of you.

Furthermore, how do you know that LLC is not my real name? Again, judge first, prove later, in classic Dan’s fashion.

“Why are those who have nothing intelligent to say, other than making personal attacks, calling names […], allowed to join in this conversation? = For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you (Matthew 7:2).

I am still waiting for an intelligent answer from you. It seems that only you are allowed to point out hypocrisy in other posters with impunity. Interestingly enough, few months back you were quite harsh on commenting on the same behavior displayed by the Pharisee in Matthew 23:3, and a little later you were complaining about being called names. Which is exactly what you are doing here. You are anything but completely blind to your own hypocrisy (Matthew 7:3-5).

A friend often talks about 'bad karma'…. and am surprised how often she is right. It appears that the Victorian Police are now experiencing their 'bad karma'. The state government of Victoria has recently announced that there will be a Royal Commission into the Victorian Police. The Commission will examine the operations and culture of the police. This has come about due to a complaint from the legal profession. The allegation is that the police have obtained 'privileged information' from a lawyer to convict several of her clients. As you know the information between lawyer and client is protected by 'privilege'….. a rock solid convention. It should never be used against defendants. But apparently it has, and the locked- up criminals will almost certainly appeal their convictions. Have to wonder if the Royal Commission might also consider this question?. Whether it is ethical to use the testimony of a known criminal to charge somebody who has no criminal record.?

True Catholic 2, I have two Catholic friends in Melbourne who told me they knew nothing of the results of Cardinal Pell's trial until I sent them articles from US sources about it. Their media reported that "the judge has suppressed findings." Cardinal Pell is widely believed to be innocent by Catholics in that country. My friends sent me articles from news sources that proved he'd been tried by the media & found guilty. Fair trial? NO!

Sue, Did you even read what True Catholic was explaining, how Fr. Kellehers case was hidden by the diocese for 30 years and later found that "Fr. Kelleher admitted to fondeling the boys private parts", in the Police Report 30 years previously? Do you only pay attention to what suits your personal agenda? And maybe news to you, but many brainwashed Catholics sadly believe their pedophile and pederast hierarchy is "innocent". You poor deceived souls.

"Bad Karma" is a good answer Malcolm, but not in how you think. Pell was found guilty of association. Pell didn't testify in his own defence on the advice of council, and he had one of the best Austriiala had to offer. It wasn't that Pell couldn't deny the charges, of course he could because he didn't commit the crime. What Pell couldn't explain was why he didn't act against those around him, and later under him when he was bishop, who were perverts. It is in that Pell was found guilty of. This little saga should make a lot of American Bishops very nervous right now .

We as Catholics have to be careful about calling anything a witch hunt. That is what was said in previous situations where people accused the clergy of abuse and we see where that got us to. There were and are abusive clerics, even among those you cannot imagine. Things have to play out to the end.

Catholics are awful quick to want to see the media or victims investigated, and yet slow to investigate or to accuse and yet quick to cover-up and hide in secrecy the failings of their own clergy. You guys ought to learn the meaning of hypocrisy. And while you're at it understand that there is no such thing as "karma", but the deserving revenge from a Just God. You might want to read and learn the Bible, instead of learning from the religious hypocrites of your Church.

The question put by Deacon Thomas Brandlin, on the 9th, is interesting. He asks… " Has anybody investigated Louise Milligan?". Guess it all comes down to basic rights?. Have they been disregarded?…What is to be done?. Australia does not have a Bill of Rights of it's own. But is a signatory to the U.N. Charter of Human Rights. Which is relevant because, inter alia, it says this. That all individuals have a right to a good reputation, and nobody should wrongfully deprive them of their good reputation. Another right says that all individuals have a right to a fair trial. You can see that if the reputation is destroyed, in the 'court of public opinion', then a fair trial becomes almost impossible. Because both juries and judges are influenced by the 'court of public opinion'. So has this particular author, and her book, deprived Cardinal Pell of his right to a fair trial? In my opinion it has…. and that was her intention from the word go.

My wife and I contributed a small amount towards Cardinal Pell's defence fund when it was advertised in a well known Australian Catholic journal "Annals". I am sure that many other readers of "Annals" would also have contributed. We sincerely hope that it was money well spent.

God bless Cardinal Pell…may the Precious Blood of Jesus surround him and Our Lady of Sorrows comfort him. May the nine choirs led by St Michael defend him and vanquish the evil spirits that incite those who are lying and wrongly accusing him, may the Holy Spirit trip them up in their lies and the truth come out. Jesus and Mary we love you. Amen.

Cardinal Pell is a holy priest,totally innocent of these foul offensive charges. What needs to play out is the truth, not a set of lies from criminals being paid by anti-Catholic bigots to get them to say what is needed to get a conviction. We are praying for you Cardinal Pell.

Bottom line is that if due process is not followed, any conviction is subject to being overturned and the possibly guilty will be freed. Hardly the way to administer any justice. NB: Austrailia has turned left the past couple of decades. Probably liberal guilt for the way they treated Asians and Aboriginess in the past. Too salve their consciences, they picked the nearest handy target; Catholic clergy.

When will the church accept its not above the law? He was caught and convicted of crimes where CHILDREN were assulted and you still want to try and defend it? This isn’t christianity this is plain evil
Even your pope has accepted his crimes. As long as people like this defend wicked crimes that would only please satan himself then people will continue to leave the faith.

As a fully confirmed catholic of 26 years now I am appalled factions of the faith could still defend such abhorrent sins. May be burn in hell with all the other rapists and may you think twice before being a child rape apologist

"He was caught and convicted of crimes where CHILDREN were assulted and you still want to try and defend it" = Who is "he", and who is defending anyone convicted (in the court of law, not by the Media)?

Just like Catholic claims that someone is convicted by the Media, you guys want to claim that just about all perpetrators of the Church are innocent, even when they're guilty. You guys claim you want to see justice, so why don't you allow the courts to decide, instead of muddying the waters with your presumptions. Final judgment will come from the Lord God, and rest assured that he will be fair, because He is the only one who knows the truth, the whole truth. Best of luck to all the liars, deceivers and excusers in this world.

“Just like Catholic claims that someone is convicted by the Media” = correct. No one (not just Catholics, but you should also be concerned about it) should be allowed to convict anyone, except for the legally appointed judges and juries, especially without due process. And not, the PA Grand Jury does not count. But, alas, you are been played and do not even realize it.

“you guys want to claim that just about all perpetrators of the Church are innocent, even when they're guilty” = Interesting and absolute comment, as usual without any factual basis.

“Final judgment will come from the Lord God, and rest assured that he will be fair, because He is the only one who knows the truth, the whole truth” = finally, a (albeit small) spark of intelligent comment. You do not know the truth, nor do I, therefore the legal process (imperfect as all human things are this side of heaven) must be allowed to follow its course. God will ultimately judge.

Do you seriously not understand who I am talking about or are you purposely misinterpreting the text?
If long sentences are hard to read and facts are difficult to decipher ill put it in dot points
-I am talking about Pell
-Being a Cardinal does not put you above the law
-He was convicted by the Australian Court, by Judge Kidd (that is the court of law) for charges of child abuse by unanimous jury
-There are hundreds of articles and blogs defending and downplaying what he did and a few comments on this page also.
-These are not Christian values
-The Pope has even said so himself when he addressed the vatican and said they need to do more to stamp out child abuse (after 2 members of the C9 have been found guilty of child abuse cases)
-I see myself as a good Catholic and it hurts and saddens me to see so much denial and downplaying of this vile sins and there is a special place in hell for people like that.

I really hope that cleared things up for you. I am happy to make some flash cards if even that was too hard

“Being a Cardinal does not put you above the law” = irrelevant to this discussion

“He was convicted by the Australian Court, by Judge Kidd (that is the court of law) for charges of child abuse by unanimous jury” = correct, and yet the entire process has been deemed tainted by many commenters (Catholic and secular alike). You may recall that the first trial was declared a mistrial due to a hung jury, so the unanimity against Pell (see? it’s not difficult to use a name when opportune) may not be as unanimous as you think. Cardinal Pell has always denied such charges, and has now appealed this verdict, so the process is not complete yet (or would you like to negate him the right of appeal?).

“There are hundreds of articles and blogs defending and downplaying what he did and a few comments on this page also” = correct, and yet confusing. Defending is one thing; downplaying is another. Can you point out who is downplaying the accuses against Cardinal Pell?

“These are not Christian values” = again, a very confusing statement. Which values? Guaranteeing due process?

“The Pope has even said so himself when he addressed the Vatican and said they need to do more to stamp out child abuse (after 2 members of the C9 have been found guilty of child abuse cases)” = irrelevant to this discussion. It is clear that the Church needs to do more (as any other organization out there) to protect children from harm.

“I see myself as a good Catholic” = irrelevant to this discussion. The way the Media is treating this scandal should concern everyone.

“it hurts and saddens me to see so much denial and downplaying of this vile sins and there is a special place in hell for people like that” = perhaps you have been reading Dan’s comments a little too much. As reported before, the “raison d'être” for the TMR is to highlight the biased behavior of the Media, not to deny or downplay the wrongdoing of some Catholics.

“I really hope that cleared things up for you” = as you can tell, you could’ve done much better. I’d give you a C+ for the effort…

Previous comment was entered as LLC i dont know if that was the moderators mistake or mine

Do you seriously not understand who I am talking about or are you purposely misinterpreting the text?
If long sentences are hard to read and facts are difficult to decipher ill put it in dot points
-I am talking about Pell
-Being a Cardinal does not put you above the law
-He was convicted by the Australian Court, by Judge Kidd (that is the court of law) for charges of child abuse by unanimous jury
-There are hundreds of articles and blogs defending and downplaying what he did and a few comments on this page also.
-These are not Christian values
-The Pope has even said so himself when he addressed the vatican and said they need to do more to stamp out child abuse (after 2 members of the C9 have been found guilty of child abuse cases)
-I see myself as a good Catholic and it hurts and saddens me to see so much denial and downplaying of this vile sins and there is a special place in hell for people like that.

I really hope that cleared things up for you. I am happy to make some flash cards if even that was too hard

LLC, I'm sorry, but I did not purposely misinterpret what you were saying. You were very vague and acted like you didn't know who Will was talking about (= Who is "he"), and it sounded like you were saying he was tried "by the Media" before he ever went to court, as many others in this forum are claiming. Others want to believe he (Pell) is still totally innocent. Thanks for clearing that up with your sarcastic "dot points" and "flash cards" comment.